Article on AGP by Dr Joe Burgo "Sympathy for the Devil: Autogynephilia as Psychic Retreat"

[UtopiaPlanitia]

Dr Burgo likes to distinguish between the 'brave men' who come to him for counselling and the bad, abusive AGPs. This article has so many words to examine these AGP men, and their shame and how much understanding and compassion they need, and no mention of their sexism or misogyny.

Burgo discusses how these men self-soothe by assuming and play-acting ideas of womanhood that are ditsy/bimbo/childlike and free from stress or responsibility, these men envy women’s ability to be placid (yup, that’s women for ya; placid all day long we are).

Burgo is dealing with a population that ostensibly wishes to reduce their paraphiliac behaviour and not with population that embraces it; I don’t believe he has a well-rounded view of the issue.

Burgo has so much compassion for these AGP men but where’s his compassion for women and what these men are doing to women and children. He wants to concentrate on building up these men’s ability to take the initiative and to be masculine. How about telling them that their ideas of womanhood are revolting and sexist Dr Burgo?

This article made me feel angry because of the omission of properly analysing the inherent sexism behind AGP but others on FWR might have different views after reading it so I thought might be interesting to discuss it.

Don’t let the early paragraphs put you off:

'Men presumed to be autogynephiles have a special power to infuriate radical feminists and others who advocate for women’s sex-based rights. To say that these women loathe AGPs would be an understatement. Porn-addled fetishists, sexual deviants, and narcissistic creeps are but a few of the caustic epithets deployed to vilify them. AGPs are self-evidently evil and scarcely human. Men who derive sexual satisfaction from putting on women’s lingerie and masturbating in front of a mirror are the devil incarnate.

In my practice as a psychotherapist, I work with a half dozen such men, some once or twice per week and others for a cluster of sessions at irregular intervals. Unlike the typical TRA who denies struggling with autogynephilia, my clients acknowledge that they’re in the grips of a sexual compulsion that torments them. They know they are not and never can be women, even though they may be tortured by the siren call to “transition.” More than anything, they long to be free of the profound shame they feel.

I approach therapy with these men just as I would with any other client–that is, with an open mind but also with a set of assumptions about human nature and what drives us. Though autogynephilia may seem almost impossible for most of us to fathom, I believe these men struggle with the same challenges the rest of us do.'

https://www.realityslaststand.com/p/sympathy-for-the-devil-autogynephilia

Interesting article to read that I wouldn't have come across myself.

I'll be interested to see his article about the abuse AGPs put their wives and families through. It could be a partner article to this, but I'm not sure it will be.

I find the general problem in this article is that while he has a very good grasp of how he sees AGPs, he simply doesn't understand what it is to be a woman, to grow up in a world as one. He can superficially see some things could be infuriating about AGPs, but he doesn't get why it's DEEPLY offensive.

He can see the deep pain and shame of the AGPs but not those attached to womanhood (which is WHY they feel being a woman is "relaxing"). I wonder if it would be easier for him if instead of dressing up as a way to reach some kind of warped maternal figure, white AGPs were dressing up as racialised servants. I do wonder if he'd feel able to write the same article talking about men who self soothe by dressing up as, say, African American servants from the 1950s who could very much be viewed as "placid" due to the societal constraints. Now I'm not saying the USA for black people in 1950 is the same as being a white women today (or even then). My point is about an absurd and insulting stereotype being discussed without much awareness for how ridiculous it is and how that is offensive. Just like it's right that blackface and fetishisation of black bodies and oppressive experiences of being black is wrong and socially absolutely unacceptable, especially by white people, so it should be that dressing up as a woman who is either a harmful stereotype (bimbo), or subject to male sexual oppression (sissy), or a sort of trad mother (denied the right to self-actualise outside the home while the father was doing manly things like earning money) is socially unacceptable. And while yes, it's socially unacceptable to dress up as a woman, that's due to ideas centering masculinity, not the female experience. And that's what "feminists" (or whatever we're called in his article) are objecting to.

I could say all this far more succinctly: he may be a good therapist for AGPs (he obviously thinks he is), but as a woman living in this world, I'd never, ever want him as my therapist and would advise any woman with any life issue that is connected to living as a real life woman, to look for someone else.

(I'm having formatting issues because I stupidly added a couple of asterisks! I wanted to add that I am deliberately using white AGPs and white women, to try to illustrate the point, but I do not at all think AGPs are only white, and definitely do not think that feminists are only white either - in my own life they're the minority. It seems the author is a white man though, so I cannot imagine he'd be comfortable publicly stating everything he did in the article, if race played a major role in being AGP).

Glad it wasn't just me irritated/enraged by the 'poor AGP men' article from a - checks notes - MAN! Of course, the AGP deserves all our sympathies, nasty women that we are!!

Joe Burgo is one of the big reasons I and many other parents have gone off Genspect. There has been a growing push to normalise AGP and have it accepted in society around the argument that oh, these ones are the nice ones, the self aware ones, the ones who don’t harm women or children. We must show them compassion and understanding and accept their “self soothing”.

To which I say, no. In addition to the dependence on women being “kind to these men” and their encroaching on our boundaries, it’s giving strength to the unevidenced argument that this is innate, a part of who these men are. And if it’s part of who these men are, you create the AGP child and AGP adolescent, turning a blind eye to boys who have been groomed by men online to “crack their egg” or via sissy porn, as well as boys who are going through a difficult puberty, who have co-morbidities or history of trauma etc (the male ROGD).

Instead of being able to explore what is driving their desire to be viewed as the opposite sex, they become budding AGPs and built into the cycle of needing support and understanding.

Yeah no.

What aweegc said.

At the same time, I wonder what the aim of the therapy is: if it’s to help these men stop their behaviour and fight the compulsion to indulge it in public, then perhaps it takes a sympathetic therapist to achieve that. I think that Dr Burgo is correct when intuiting that a female, feminist therapist (or perhaps a woman with any self respect) would struggle to be sympathetic to these men, I certainly do.

If compassionate therapy can help them see how destructive their behaviour is I don’t want to discourage it. If it leads to normalisation or enabling, then it needs to be discouraged. Unfortunately some male psychotherapists have a poor track record when it comes to dealing with sexually deviant male behaviour (search for ‘Kentler experiment’ for an egregious example).

The comments are worth a read. Totally gets called out.

Final sentence: “I believe these men struggle with the same challenges the rest of us do.” 1) Poorly constructed/ ambiguous (what challenges?) 2) Erm, nope. I believe you’re incorrect. But we’ll have to agree to disagree on that because after all you’re talking about beliefs, not facts.

And channelling my inner Jim Royle: “Psychic retreat - my arse.”

In the near future, I’ll be writing an article that details the narcissistic abuse these men inflict upon their children and ex-wives, both to highlight the suffering of the victims and to further distinguish abusive autogynephiles from the brave men in my practice.

Be interesting to see what the writer thinks is the difference between the married agps abusing their wives and The 'brave men'

he simply doesn't understand what it is to be a woman, to grow up in a world as one.

This sums up all the problems we face with men driving GI policy and laws. Sometimes, I feel as though we’re living through a Black Mirror episode and it’s only going to get worse.

Yes. Go, Hazel-Rah!

”Psychologists, treat thyselves.”

@IcakethereforeIam

I actually skipped the article and went straight to the comments.

Same. And it's quite clear that the people, I'm assuming mostly women, writing those know far more about it than he does. They spell out exactly how and why it's so harmful, too.

I don't think it's much of a surprise to anyone why some men sympathise with other men's sex drive, though. And ignore all the women that are needed to satisfy it.

Interesting article, thanks. The comments under it are also really good.

I liked the article. I found it to be a helpful contribution from a particular perspective. Necessarily limited which is why the comments are good additions.

The things I liked about the article were the acknowledgement of the addictive component of straight men seeing themselves as women, and also the description of the rage and defence against anyone questioning it that occurs for some.

I like the therapist making a stand for compassionate treatment. The definition of compassion for me is to recognise suffering and to want to help. The fact this therapist is able to do this is good I think. No-one can be forced to feel compassionate, particularly if they themselves have suffered at the hands of such people. Perhaps he could have explored that position more although I do think he touches in it.

There was a comment from a female therapist who said she no longer works with such men and also not with eating disorders. That's her choice and I can understand her reasons. But I would be sad if people with these conditions who wanted (even ambivalently) to seek help were not able to find a therapist because we'd all decided that.

The article implies to me that the compassionate response to a man suffering from agp is to stay reality-based and not to play into the fantasy that they are in fact a woman. I would have liked him to have a few sentences on what he thinks "being kind" would actually look like for society as a whole.

I personally would also have wanted a mention of the cultural factors of why it might be seen as masochistic or humiliating for a man to be treated as a woman. But then again he had a lot to say about individual psychology so maybe he didn't have room or is not interested in a systemic analysis. Pity. That's also perhaps why he doesn't fully appreciate the feminist perspective.

'infuriate' ..... 'loathe'.....

No, not got that much energy or interest to spare.

Bored? Yes. Revolted when it involves using non consenting women for grubby sexual jollies and major issues with boundaries? Yup. And fed up that my emotions whatever they are feed the fevered thrill of it all for the grotty individual sweating and panting. What gets people off is not my problem, I want nothing to do with it. I don't want to be involved, I don't want to know. I don't want to try on pants in M&S that some twit has cum on, or walk over their cum in the changing rooms because they find that gives them a cheap thrill. I do not want to be involved with some idiot stuffing a used tampon up his bum.

The root of the issue is not that some men have this fetish, the issue is the ruddy grim behaviour of those who want to rub it on women. Decent people don't do this. And no, the fetish is not an excuse for that behaviour, they can help it. They choose not to.

I feel about the same as I would in being harassed and used by a flasher. Put it away mate and fuck off.

women’s ability to be placid (yup, that’s women for ya; placid all day long we are).

TBF, this isn't an individual error on the part of the therapist. Men do have a long history of struggling to tell the difference between women and dugongs.

Just to add as I didn't make it clear, I am a psychotherapist.

I think that another aspect of compassion is taking the time to understand the suffering so that a solution can be found. I think that part of the current problem is the simplistic idea that "trans people suffer and their suffering is caused by society so society must change." I think this article is useful in combatting that notion but in order to do that, some people have to get close to the suffering and detail it in order to properly understand it.

The writer of the article is very biased towards one perspective ("brave men" is particularly telling as others have pointed out) but that doesn't bother me. I'd rather have his perspective than not. Particularly in the sphere of psychotherapy we really need to have this discussion. And to find our wat out of the mess we're in we need diversity of perspective.

I admit I started reading the article, a lot of the terminology flew right over my head. After a few paragraphs I thought, 'is there much more?'(there wasn't), scrolled to the end and found the comments, which were a refreshing surprise.

I think he tries to draw a line between his clients (the 'good' AGPs) and the rest, although

I have deep compassion for all men who struggle with autogynephilia, though when they are most defended against their inner truth, most in denial about the ways they are damaged, it’s hard to hold onto that compassion. When confronted by their hostility and belligerent defensiveness, I understand why those who want to preserve single-sex spaces come to despise them.

Gosh, he's so compassionate, so....kind. I also get the impression from the above quote that he doesn't want to preserve single sex spaces. Although, it might just be clumsy wording on his part.

A lot of tw and their allies have weaponised victimhood.

I’ll continue helping my clients to feel better about themselves as men while encouraging them to emerge from their psychic retreat. That means (1) accepting their need for other people in general and a female partner in particular, rather than taking themselves as the object of their desires

Is there any evidence that this can be successful? Most AGPs that we hear about (people like Debbie Hayton) have a long history of cross-dressing, then marriage to a woman and usually children. Having a female partner hasn't stopped them from transitioning.

Is he suggesting that they should seek out a female partner as part of their treatment? I hope that's not what he means, but it's not at all clear.

Until they're completely cured, they should be nowhere near women, and certainly shouldn't be entering into relationships with them.

I’ll continue helping my clients to feel better about themselves as men while encouraging them to emerge from their psychic retreat. That means (1) accepting their need for other people in general and a female partner in particular, rather than taking themselves as the object of their desires

Surely they 'need other people' in the same way that a man might want to have actual sex with a woman and not just masturbate. In that needing the other people is the best form of their fetish they can get.

Having other people regard you as a woman is the ultimate. It's the real deal. It's the whole point.

Standing alone in women's underwear masturbating in front of the mirror, is just a wank.

The audience is the whole thing. Whether that's a partner, or the public

It looks as if psychologists are not going to be able to explain it or cure it, so what good are they? Well, maybe to issue a loud warning to women? Or to point out that the law should never have been changed to valorise these men, and that this has led to family breakdown?

From reading his Twitter comments and those of the people who follow him, he comes across as an MRA.
His vitriol aimed at women is disturbing and his perspective seems one sided. He isn't a woman trapped in prison or a psych ward with an AGP who's acting out, is he.

The audience is the whole thing. Whether that's a partner, or the public.

Transitioning is a form of coercive control. But what he had to say about narcissism helped me understand why my TW acquaintances are so enraged by any deviation from the creed - it's defensive.

Still annoying though.

I found it very helpful and informative . I’m not really understanding the hostility towards the writer.

I agree with this comment from Cessilia Caperoski:

I must impress upon male psychologists that the scariest men to women (like the ones that actually commit harm against us) are the vulnerable ones (ESPECIALLY the vulnerable ones with weird sex problems). Not trying to insult men who are trying to overcome their agp coping mechanisms. Just stating a fact so male psychologists stop blaming us for something we’re not even doing wrong.

The psychologist does seem to see them as vulnerable and that seems to excuse them from blame for their actions. These men have gathered into a movement that is determined to erase women's spaces and safety.

I thought this bit was interesting:

"Teens in my practice often contemplate their future transition as if it will be a major achievement, the most important thing they’ll ever do, meanwhile neglecting other important questions about their future–like which career path to choose and how to earn a living. Behind this fantasy, I sense their dread of the demands and responsibilities that will come with adulthood."